AHC: India gets Dominion status in 1920s
- Thread starter Will Kürlich Kerl
- Start date
Hmmmmm - Indian Dominion Status was not really discussed in parliament until the early 30s so its a bit of an ask!
The only thing I can think of is having more Indians volunteer for service in the Great war (as if 1.3 Million wasn't enough!)
How about an earlier initiative in India by the British to raise troops to fight for "King and Empire" results in a greater number of troops earlier fighting in Europe.
This results in an even greater number of Indian soldiers 'mixing' with the British population to a greater extent.
Its weird for me to write that because I'm from Sussex and the City of Brighton has several memorials (India Gate at the Royal Pavilion and the Chattri War Memorial) to both those killed and wounded in the first world war - so I know quite a bit about it - but for the rest of the country their service is not so well known.
Have similar memorials throughout Britain coupled with a greater Indian impact on the British people and perhaps have some improvements in India itself along with several battles in Belgium where Indian troops are more instrumental and maybe the conditions could be more mature for a possibility of Indian Dominion Status being granted.
An earlier, or a longer, or both WWI. The war was decisive in creating a shared national experience for the Indians, as for the Canadians, Australians, etc. Creating the scenario of an earlier WWI might bring more people towards dominionist movements earlier on and set the stage for dominion status in the 20s. A longer WWI...if the war lasts into 1919, means that the Government of India takes control over the Middle Eastern theatre, which means more Indian troops in the region, which increases the possibility for future discontentment and thus social and political change.
The problem is that it's not just additional pressure from below in India which would need to be created in order to have Dominion Status in the 1920s, it's also a change of mindset in the UK and among a good number of the autonomous Indian princes (whose positions were strengthened by the absence of a strong all-Indian government).
IOTL, there was a great deal of opposition to the suggestion that the proposals for the Federation of India represented an irreversable step to Dominion Status, or even that 'responsible government' was itself equivalent to DS. To produce a situation where DS was not just discussed but delivered in the 1920s means butterflying away enough of that opposition as to enable it to be overcome.
I'm not sure that a longer WWI, or greater Indian participation would do that. It'd probably need little less than a British defeat in WWI.
IOTL, there was a great deal of opposition to the suggestion that the proposals for the Federation of India represented an irreversable step to Dominion Status, or even that 'responsible government' was itself equivalent to DS. To produce a situation where DS was not just discussed but delivered in the 1920s means butterflying away enough of that opposition as to enable it to be overcome.
I'm not sure that a longer WWI, or greater Indian participation would do that. It'd probably need little less than a British defeat in WWI.
Increase Indian participation in the Boer war to put them on the same basis as South Africa.
Bring forward the Munro Minto act, and the government of India Act 1919 which could give Indian proto federal states ( or Dominions in their own right.)
Have the Empire settlement act of 1922 include indians and a formal Imperial preference system, flood SA with Indian immigrants.
Bring forward the Statue of Westminster.
Though I think you are more likely to get the Indian States as dominions specifically to avoid the issue of the Princely States and the size of India. Madras, UP, Bengal, Burma etc are more manageable initially.
Bring forward the Munro Minto act, and the government of India Act 1919 which could give Indian proto federal states ( or Dominions in their own right.)
Have the Empire settlement act of 1922 include indians and a formal Imperial preference system, flood SA with Indian immigrants.
Bring forward the Statue of Westminster.
Though I think you are more likely to get the Indian States as dominions specifically to avoid the issue of the Princely States and the size of India. Madras, UP, Bengal, Burma etc are more manageable initially.
One of the additional issues you face is that Britain realised the need for a strong, united, independent India to be a bulwark against the powerful Soviet threat, which was industrialising rapidly by the 1930s. In the 1920s, the USSR was in a much worse economic place and many people thought it would not survive, so the Brits might be more content with keeping the Indians in their place, or on splitting up the country into various states.
Alcsentre Calanice
Gone Fishin'
A modernized China threatening UK in India with patriotic propaganda?
Derek Pullem
Donor
In the same sense as the Dominion of South Africa was racist at its heart could there have been a Dominion (or Dominions) of India which were caste ridden or driven by property qualifications?
In 1930 South Africa non-whites were practically all excluded from having a direct vote (some could vote for white "representatives"). In Canada, native peoples and asian immigrants were excluded until the second world war. In Australia aboriginal voters were effectively excluded until the 1950's and 60's.
It would not be impossible for white controlled "Dominions" supported in some way by the Indian middle and upper classes to be formed. I think it would need an external threat for this to take place - possible more successful or outward looking Soviet Union (Afghanistan SSR?) leading to communist agitation and an alliance between the British and some of the Indian elite.
In 1930 South Africa non-whites were practically all excluded from having a direct vote (some could vote for white "representatives"). In Canada, native peoples and asian immigrants were excluded until the second world war. In Australia aboriginal voters were effectively excluded until the 1950's and 60's.
It would not be impossible for white controlled "Dominions" supported in some way by the Indian middle and upper classes to be formed. I think it would need an external threat for this to take place - possible more successful or outward looking Soviet Union (Afghanistan SSR?) leading to communist agitation and an alliance between the British and some of the Indian elite.
Make Gandhi an Advocated India a Commonwealth/Dominion instead of Independence that would wake India as a Dominion in 1920
But No Offense
But No Offense
TinyTartar
Banned
I suppose more of a settler presence would help; after all, South Africa got this status in 1910, and the whites were my no means even close to a majority.
Having a settler run government might make this a possibility. However, the odds of arousing Indian anger, especially among the autonomous princes who were fine with the current set up, might make this kind of iffy.
Having a settler run government might make this a possibility. However, the odds of arousing Indian anger, especially among the autonomous princes who were fine with the current set up, might make this kind of iffy.
Only as a part of a "reformed" empire after ww1 maybe. there was a conference in 1919 and 21 i think where if there was political will reforms could have been forced through.
Also the white colonies should have forced the imperial war cabinet to be made permanent after the war and maybe expand into the board of trade . Early post war imperial preference could have been very logical to be honest . And also having the british focus more on developing colonies/dominions instead of the americas/europe could have helped alot aswell.
Also the white colonies should have forced the imperial war cabinet to be made permanent after the war and maybe expand into the board of trade . Early post war imperial preference could have been very logical to be honest . And also having the british focus more on developing colonies/dominions instead of the americas/europe could have helped alot aswell.
Lost Freeway
Banned
From what I can tell, the Liberals were also big believers in the "White Man's Burden" which basically translated to giving non-whites no office higher than dog-catcher.
well labor were kinda anti colonial and not really a thing in the twenties to be honest and the conservatives were even worse with the white man burden. The only party with a modicum chance for reforming the empire should/could have been the liberals to be honest.
But i still maintain that not reforming the empire to atleast get the white dominions onside even more closely post ww1 was the policy disaster of the 20th century for the british to be honest. After that you would have to deal with india and africa colonies more or less eventually and voila you might have the empire to this day if handeled semi compentently...
Would that really be applicable to India? For Canadians and Austrlians wasn't it more that a unique identity and shared national experience emerged to distinguish themselves from just being British subjects who happened to live overseas. I doubt Indians ever saw themselves ever in that light?